Attorney at Law, Admission to practice.
The applicant, pro se.
Mark P. Sutliff, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.
A single justice of this court allowed the motion of the defendant, Board of Bar Examiners, to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint seeking admission to the Massachusetts bar. There was no error.
The single justice correctly held that the plaintiff sought to relitigate the matter of the denial of her admission to the bar which was initially determined by a single justice of this court in 1979. The present action is the plaintiff's fourth attempt to gain admission to the bar. See Matter of an Application for Admission to the Bar of the Commonwealth, 392 Mass. 1001 (1984), cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1057 (1985); Matter of an Application for Admission to the Bar of the Commonwealth, 385 Mass. 1006 (1982); Matter of an Application for Admission to the Bar of the Commonwealth, 378 Mass. 795 (1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1046 (1980). The plaintiff's legal theory has changed but this change does not save her case from dismissal under the doctrine of claim preclusion. See Bagley v. Moxley, 407 Mass. 633 , 638 (1990).